3 total
Discipline committee decision revoked and new hearing ordered due to uneven scrutiny of evidence.
The appellant optometrist appealed a decision of the College's discipline committee finding him guilty of professional misconduct for the sexual abuse of a patient.
The Divisional Court allowed the appeal and remitted the matter for a new hearing, finding that the discipline committee made palpable and overriding errors in its credibility assessments.
Specifically, the committee subjected the appellant's evidence to a higher standard of scrutiny than the complainant's evidence, resulting in an unfair proceeding.
Motion for production of ICRC record dismissed as the committee did not exercise a statutory power of decision regarding the applicant.
The applicant, a midwife, brought a motion for an order requiring the College of Midwives of Ontario to file the complete record of proceedings relating to an Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC) decision about another midwife.
The applicant had made a mandatory report about the other midwife, and the ICRC decided to take no action but made critical comments about the applicant's report.
The applicant sought the record for her application for judicial review.
The Divisional Court dismissed the motion, finding that the ICRC did not exercise a statutory power of decision with respect to the applicant, and that the College was prohibited from producing the record under the confidentiality provisions of the Regulated Health Professions Act.
Substantial indemnity costs of $75,000 awarded to professional association acting as a public interest litigant.
The applicants sought substantial indemnity costs of approximately $116,000 following their successful challenge to provisions of the Building Code Act, 1992 and the Building Code Regulation.
The applicants argued they were public interest litigants.
The court agreed, finding that the applicant Association was virtually compelled to bring the application to defend its statutory mandate to regulate professional engineers.
The court awarded substantial indemnity costs but reduced the quantum to $75,000, finding the claimed amount exceeded what was fair and reasonable for a two-day hearing.
